Mailman 3 September 2012 - docs

[issue15920] make howto/regex.rst doctests pass
by Chris Jerdonek Sept. 17, 2012

Sept. 17, 2012

New submission from Chris Jerdonek: This issue is to make the doctests in howto/regex.rst pass using vanilla doctest. After this issue, 10 out of the 17 HOWTO's will pass with vanilla doctest. Patch attached. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation files: issue-doctest-howto-regex-1.patch keywords: patch messages: 170295 nosy: cjerdonek, docs@python, orsenthil priority: normal severity: normal stage: patch review status: open title: make howto/regex.rst doctests pass versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27173/issue-doctest-howto-regex-1.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15920> _______________________________________

3 3

python-2.7.3-docs-html.tar.bz2 permissions
by Bruce Dubbs Sept. 16, 2012

Sept. 16, 2012

When I download python-2.7.3-docs-html.tar.bz2, I want to extract the files into /usr/share/doc/Python-2.7.3. This is easy enough to do as root, except the permissions are 0640 (directories 0750). It would be a lot more convenient if the files were 0644 and directories 0755. -- Bruce Dubbs linuxfromscratch.org

1 0

[issue15606] re.VERBOSE whitespace behavior not completely documented
by Ezio Melotti Sept. 15, 2012

Sept. 15, 2012

Changes by Ezio Melotti <ezio.melotti(a)gmail.com>: ---------- stage: -> patch review _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15606> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue15789] mention shell-like parts of the std lib in the subprocess docs
by Chris Rebert Sept. 15, 2012

Sept. 15, 2012

New submission from Chris Rebert: To further dissuade people from using subprocess.Popen's shell=True option unnecessarily, this patch points out that some common shell features are also available directly in Python via certain modules & functions. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation files: subprocess.rst.patch keywords: patch messages: 169188 nosy: cvrebert, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: mention shell-like parts of the std lib in the subprocess docs versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.3, Python 3.4 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27013/subprocess.rst.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15789> _______________________________________

5 6

[issue15932] files in the csv documentation's examples are not closed
by berdario Sept. 15, 2012

Sept. 15, 2012

New submission from berdario: I changed the examples to use the with statement ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation files: doc.diff keywords: patch messages: 170394 nosy: berdario, docs@python, ezio.melotti priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: files in the csv documentation's examples are not closed Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file27181/doc.diff _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15932> _______________________________________

4 3

[issue15831] comma after leading optional argument is after bracket in docs
by Chris Jerdonek Sept. 15, 2012

Sept. 15, 2012

New submission from Chris Jerdonek: >From docs(a)python.org: """ In a number of places we find documentation with optional leading arguments where the meta-notation (square brackets) are in the wrong place. For example, for range, the standard doc heading says range([start], stop [, step]) # The comma after start should be inside the square bracket, not outside. The same error occurs with docs for print, and for slice, for random.randrange and for random.seed, etc, etc. This seems a consistent bug whenever a function or method takes an optional first argument, and it looks like it might have been put there by some tool that generates the docs. I use Python 3 - perhaps there was once a time when one had to supply the comma if one omitted the first argument? In Python 3 it gives errors if one follows the documentation carefully and uses the comma. """" (or see http://mail.python.org/pipermail/docs/2012-August/010051.html ) ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 169547 nosy: cjerdonek, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: comma after leading optional argument is after bracket in docs type: behavior versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15831> _______________________________________

5 33

French translation of the documentation
by Claire Revillet Sept. 14, 2012

Sept. 14, 2012

Hi everybody, I'm new to this mailing-list, so i'll present myself before asking my questions. My name is Claire and i'm a member of the francophone association for the promotion of Python (afpy). As part of my activity in afpy, i'm working on the translation in french of parts of docs.python.org . Maybe it's not the good place to ask, but i could not find another "maintained" place for them: For now, i'm translating on pootle.python.org. I'm wondering if the site is actually maintained and more precisly if the english sources are up-to-date. What makes me wonder is this email: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/doc-sig/2011-December/003932.html but the doc-sig ML seems dead :/ My other point is: this pootle is a great idea that permit us to translate. good! but where is going our work ? Was there something envisaged to host the translated pages when the pootle was created ? For what I can see, nothing is planed to put them on the official website (i could find no language selection widget). The hosting problem could be solve by hosting the translated pages on the afpy website (which makes sense as providing french documentation is part of our role), but maybe a protocole has been prepared for the extraction from pootle and rebuilding the translated docs ? We have extracted the .po files, but we don't know what to do with them. If someone has any idea/hint for us, you're welcome :) And thank you for the great job you're doing on the english documentation. Claire Revillet

1 0

unittest documentation mistake?
by John Maxwell Sept. 14, 2012

Sept. 14, 2012

Hi, I believe this is a mistake in the unittest module docs at http://docs.python.org/library/unittest.html: "A test suite is a collection of test cases, test suites, or both. It is used to aggregate tests that should be executed together." Are you sure you don't mean: "A test suite is a collection of test cases, fixtures, or both. It is used to aggregate tests that should be executed together." I'm not actually familiar with the module, so feel free to tell me if I got it wrong. John

1 0

[issue15437] Merge Doc/ACKS and Misc/ACKS
by Chris Jerdonek Sept. 13, 2012

Sept. 13, 2012

New submission from Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdonek(a)gmail.com>: This issue is to merge the Doc/ACKS and Misc/ACKS files as discussed here: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-July/121096.html ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation keywords: easy messages: 166247 nosy: cjerdonek, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Merge Doc/ACKS and Misc/ACKS _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15437> _______________________________________

8 25

[issue15439] Include Misc/ACKS names into the documentation
by Chris Jerdonek Sept. 13, 2012

Sept. 13, 2012

New submission from Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdonek(a)gmail.com>: This issue is to include the names in Misc/ACKS into the documentation -- in place of the names from Doc/ACKS.txt. This was mentioned in the discussion for issue 15437, which is to add the names from Doc/ACKS.txt into Misc/ACKS. This issue should be done shortly after issue 15437. The current issue can include (1) converting Misc/ACKS into rst format, (2) deleting DOC/ACKS.txt (after confirming that any changes since issue 15437 are reflected in Misc/ACKS), and (3) resolving the intros in the two files with about.rst's surrounding text so that the text makes sense when included into the main documentation. Should Guido's note of acknowledgment in Misc/ACKS be included as is? And should a new "Python Acknowledgments" section be added to the docs, or is it okay for this more general acknowledgment to be included in the section called "About these documents"? If the former, the "About these documents" section could link to the more general "Python Acknowledgments" section to reference documentation contributors. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation keywords: easy messages: 166279 nosy: cjerdonek, docs@python, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, jcea, pitrou priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Include Misc/ACKS names into the documentation _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15439> _______________________________________

10 20